Thom Hartmann: My Answer to a Libertarian Caller Trashing OWS

[thomhartmann]

Run time: 02:34 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkiGdJCmxlM   Posted on YouTube: November 16, 2011 By YouTube Member: TheBigPictureRT Views on YouTube: 576   Posted on DU: November 17, 2011 By DU Member: thomhartmann Views on DU: 1861

 
The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann on RT TV & FSTV "live" 9pm and 11pm check www.thomhartmann.com/tv for local listings

[libodem]

1. Good, answer, Thom

:hi: :applause:

[Moonwalk]

2. Meh. He really isn't answering the question...and he really needs to!

The caller asks two questions (1) "Do they have a right" to camp out on public land--and if they do who or what gives them that right, and (2) What would you think if gun owners or pro-lifers camped out?

He basically answers the second one (kinda)--the question he answers is "Why are they camping out?" Not if they can camp out. He more or less says that he'd be okay giving supporting anyone's right to camp out if they can point to reasons that make for equal passion and motivation to do this. Meaning, things are so bad, this is the only way to make a statement. Why OWS is doing this, however, is a different question, and wasn't really asked. The question asked: "What right have they to do this?" really needs to be answered.

Because when someone asks "What right do they have to do this?" they imply that those doing it aren't real citizens. It's like calling into question the President's birth certificate or religion. If he wasn't born here, he hasn't the right. If he's not of a certain religion, he hasn't the right. And the same implication is happening here with this "right" question--and that's the reason it much be addressed. Because those who ask it aren't seeing OWS as composed of their friends and neighbors--and *them* if they get to a point where they feel that passionate. They need an answer to that question so they see *themselves* in these protesters, rather than identifying with the corporate folk and seeing the protesters squatters.

So we need to say "Public land belongs to the public, and should always be used for the public good..." etc. We need to point out, as well, the ways in which corporations have cheated the public, like getting congress to sell them lumber off public land cheap, then selling that at a huge profit overseas...which means the public doesn't get the profit off *our* land, nor do we get the goods off *our* land. Meaning we need to get across the double standard of questioning the use of public land in this instance, but not in instances where it has really hurt America.

Because this is the next step for the corporations. First, they get the legal right to be a "person" then they make sure that it seems like they are the only legal person out there, and those they stomp on are not people. We have to try and switch the view of this libertarian from identifying with corporate "persons" over regular persons--and from thinking that corporations have rights to public lands that regular people do not.

[freshwest]

3. Well said.

[Enthusiast]

4. Beautifully said, Thom!

The things Thom cited are bad enough. But events of the last 12 years have demonstrated that the corporations have taken almost all the political influence for themselves. In other words, democracy for regular Americans has essentially gone away.

Regular Americans are in favor of the following things. Why can't we have them? These aren't wild eyed crazy liberal ideas. These are what the American mainstream want.